ARCHIVED - Mid-Term Evaluation of the Implementation of the Cabinet Directive on Streamlining Regulation

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
•  

This page has been archived.

4. Summary and Recommendations

4.1 Summary

Relevance: In establishing the External Advisory Committee on Smart Regulation, and by implementing the CDSR to respond to its recommendations, the Government of Canada recognized the importance of regulations to the social and economic well-being of Canadians. The objectives of the CDSR continue to be aligned with federal government priorities and to address an identified need. These government regulatory priorities are identified in documents such as Budget Speeches, which call for regulatory approaches in specific areas, and are focused on achieving their intended objectives efficiently.

Performance—Effectiveness: A moderate level of success has been achieved to date. With a few exceptions (notably service standards), outputs such as training courses, advice and tools to support departments and agencies have been produced as planned. The need for improvements in the areas of partnerships and communications has been identified. In addition, there has been a moderate increase in the capacity of departments and agencies to meet CDSR requirements in the areas of interdepartmental and interjurisdictional cooperation, reduction of administrative burden, use of service standards, cost-benefit analysis, and performance measurement and evaluation. This increased capacity has resulted in levels of compliance with CDSR requirements of over 90% in most of these areas.

The level of success achieved to date is a result of the collaboration between TBS-RAS and departments and agencies. Making further progress on desired outcomes within the next two and a half years, including intermediate outcomes felt by regulated industries, will depend on whether departments and TBS-RAS can recruit and retain qualified personnel with the appropriate skills set or can access this expertise when needed, and on whether TBS-RAS has the resources required. A significant barrier to evaluating the extent to which these intermediate outcomes are achieved is the lack of performance measurement information. Performance Measurement and Evaluation Plans are required for high-impact regulations only, and this just since July 2009.

Performance—Efficiency and Economy: TBS-RAS was able to achieve the outputs and outcomes described above with limited resources and at a lower cost than originally expected, thus demonstrating both efficiency and economy (although the former is based on limited evidence). The current model, in which TBS-RAS acts as a central oversight body, is consistent with best practices in OECD countries. No alternatives were identified.

4.2 Recommendations

The recommendations for TBS-RAS can be grouped into three main areas:

• Ensuring that departments and agencies have adequate support going forward
• Increasing and improving communications
• Ensuring that reporting requirements are met

4.2.1 Support for Departments and Agencies

Despite limited resources, TBS-RAS has developed products that have allowed departments and agencies to increase their capacity to meet CDSR requirements. Additional increases in capacity can be achieved with more targeted support.

Recommendation 1: Address the remaining gaps in outputs, such as guidance on service standards.

Recommendation 2: Continue the current efforts to create pools of qualified cost-benefit analysts and regulatory experts to help ensure that departments and agencies have access to individuals with the appropriate skills set.

4.2.2 Communications

Products and services can help achieve increases in capacity only if they are known and used. TBS-RAS needs to focus on communicating more effectively with departments and agencies, as a number of them were unfamiliar with its products and services.

Recommendation 3: Establish an overall communications strategy for the CDSR. In particular, departments and agencies need to be made aware of TBS-RAS products and services, partnering efforts, and research and information-sharing initiatives.

4.2.3 Reporting

Reporting on production of outputs, use of financial resources, and achievement of outcomes is important for identifying:

• progress made with the resources used, for accountability purposes; and
• gaps in performance, in order to guide future plans.

Improvements are required so that reporting can be used as intended. Specifically, there are gaps in reporting, both on the use of funds allocated for CDSR implementation and on leveraged resources. In addition, departments and agencies need feedback from TBS-RAS on their progress in implementing the CDSR.

Recommendation 4: Ensure that reporting requirements are met and that departments and agencies include the level of additional resources (if any) expended to meet CDSR requirements. Full reporting will provide a government-wide picture of CDSR resource needs.

Recommendation 5: Complete departments' performance reports and communicate the results to ensure that departments and agencies receive the feedback needed.

Recommendation 6: Begin planning for the five-year evaluation within the next six months to ensure that a performance measurement strategy is in place and that appropriate data are captured in an ongoing, systematic and user-friendly manner.

---

Footnotes

[1] In addition to the support provided by the Centre of Regulatory Expertise, sixteen federal departments and agencies were allocated funds to develop internal capacity to implement the CDSR.

[2] To improve readability, the evaluation questions appear in a different order in section 3, “Conclusions and Supporting Findings.”

[3] Originally, as noted in Appendix A, the intent was to survey 80 department and agency contacts, but the actual number surveyed was 70.

[4] Smart Regulation: A Regulatory Strategy for Canada

[5] Detailed survey results are presented in Appendix E.

[6] Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Building an Institutional Framework for Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA), 2008.

[7] Ibid. OECD Reviews of Regulatory Reform—Regulatory Reform in Canada—Government Capacity to Assure High Quality Regulation, 2002.

• Previous Page
• Table of Contents
•